It starts with "The Short Version", but even that looks like several pages of text. In the olden days, there was something called an "Abstract" that worked pretty well - the author could summarize their own work to say what the paper was about.
replyUnfortunately not all ideas can be meaningfully compressed into just a few sentences without completely destroying the important parts, and this is especially the case in higher-level math, stats, ML, and deep learning.
replyAlso, IMO there is an effective abstract anyway under the title text:
The cause of polysemanticity in early model organisms wasn’t superposition, but several ordinary, mostly fixable issues. We can now understand most neurons in models up to trillions of parameters, and think the outlook for mechanistic interpretability may be far better than we thought.
The prose sounds nonsensical. It could be that I am uninformed; it could also be that the text is in fact nonsense.
replyA lack of clarity often means that the ideas are confused, or that the author is trying to obfuscate weak claims.
On length and complexity, it gives it a veneer of weight and expertise and yet everything inside is vaporous.